See the inspiring stories Come meet us Time to legalize weed?
OPINION
Winston Churchill

Iran's false promise not to pursue nukes: Column

As a friend, Israel urges America to abandon toothless deal before it's too late.

Tzipi Hotovely
Knesset member Tzipi Hotovely in 2012.

“A true friend never gets in your way unless you happen to be going down,” Arnold Glasow said.

In opposing the Iran deal, Israel has been accused of not pointing towards a better alternative and even of being against a diplomatic solution entirely. Aside from wronging Israel, these claims obscure what needs to be done to truly prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.

As the country with the most at stake, Israel favors a diplomatic solution more than anyone. But this does not mean that any diplomatic outcome is satisfactory. A diplomatic "non-solution" is worse than maintaining — and augmenting — the existing sanctions regime for the very reason that it will prevent a genuine diplomatic resolution, by releasing Iran from the only pressure that could bring it about.

The initial positions of the international community — which were largely conceded — suggest what an acceptable deal might look like. Such an agreement would insist, among other things, on the complete suspension of enrichment and dismantlement of related infrastructure, and on Iran’s acceptance of ‘anytime-anywhere’ inspections of all of its nuclear and military facilities, to reliably verify this suspension.

If Iran were not led by an aggressive regime inspired by a violent ideology, openly committed to eliminating Israel, heavily invested in fomenting insurrection throughout the Middle East and revealed to be pursuing military know-how relevant only to the use of nuclear weapons, its nuclear program could be assessed like that of other countries.

But it is all of those things, making a mockery of its assertion that “under no circumstances will Iran ever seek, develop or acquire any nuclear weapons”, as appears in the text of the agreement.

It goes without saying that Israel is not alone in understanding this to be an outright lie.

Some have argued that ‘anytime-anywhere’ inspections are an unrealistic goal. Iran’s willingness to repeatedly flout standard IAEA oversight mechanisms shows this attitude to be misguided. Iran is a unique case, clearly meriting special attention.

Some maintain that a better agreement could not have been achieved, evidenced by Iran’s refusal to concede key elements of its nuclear program despite years of sanctions. But this conclusion isn’t merited by the facts.

No one concludes from criminals’ unrepentant wrongdoing that law-enforcement authorities should just acquiesce to their criminal conduct. The correct conclusion is to be vigilant in enforcing the law, by increasing the severity of penalties and doubling down on enforcement.

This is true of criminality in general and it is especially true when dealing with a brutal regime that has a proven track record of disdain for the common principles to which law-abiding countries adhere. Iran’s openly belligerent attitude towards the United States should serve as a wake-up call to any with doubts regarding the true mentality of this regime, its ongoing ‘charm offensive’ notwithstanding.

If the threat posed by this deal weren’t genuine, Israel would have no interest in serving as an isolated voice of dissent. We have nothing to gain — and very much to lose — by being openly at odds with our greatest friends and allies on such a key matter.

The unison with which Israel and moderate Arab states in the region have reacted underscores the gravity of the menace to Israel, to the Middle East and to the world posed by this deal. We would be remiss in not doing everything possible to respectfully alert the United States and the international community to the very real perils inherent in it. That is what true friendship is about.

Winston Churchill famously said: “It is not enough that we do our best; sometimes we must do what is required.” As in so many things, Churchill was of course right. This is one of those times. Unlike what some have argued, the alternative to this deal is not inevitable war. The alternative is increased pressure to ultimately obtain an acceptable agreement. Enabling this deal to go forward, on the contrary, will pave the way to a nuclear-armed Iran.

It is not too late for the free world, and its leader, the United States, to change course and do what is required to prevent that from happening.

Tzipi Hotovely​ is deputy foreign minister of Israel.

In addition to its own editorials, USA TODAY publishes diverse opinions from outside writers, including our Board of Contributors. To read more columns like this, go to the Opinion front page.

Featured Weekly Ad